THE NATION'S WILL
Before meeting Mr Heath, M Pompidou said The crux of the matter is that there is a European conception or idea, and the question to be ascertained is whether the United Kingdom's conception is in- deed European. That will be the aim of my meeting with Mr Heath.' If that in- deed was the aim of the Heath-Pompidou meeting it can be stated at once that it will prove to have been an utter waste of time: for whatever else may be said for or against Mr Heath at the present junc- ture, one thing is quite clear and this is that he does not speak the nation's mind nor do the policies he pursues represent its will. Before meeting Mr Heath, M Pompidou said The crux of the matter is that there is a European conception or idea, and the question to be ascertained is whether the United Kingdom's conception is in- deed European. That will be the aim of my meeting with Mr Heath.' If that in- deed was the aim of the Heath-Pompidou meeting it can be stated at once that it will prove to have been an utter waste of time: for whatever else may be said for or against Mr Heath at the present junc- ture, one thing is quite clear and this is that he does not speak the nation's mind nor do the policies he pursues represent its will.
This country is, or should be, indebted to M Pompidou for the clarity and quality of his thinking. He has managed to spell out a good deal better than Mr Heath what it is that Britain is supposed to do and to become. 'We' said M Pompidou, of the Six, 'are moving towards an economic and monetary union, at any rate I hope so, in spite of recent difficulties:. Is Bri- tain ready to go ahead? In the mone- tary field, for instance, this would mean rather big changes for her by comparison with her present position. Thus we shall have a whole series of specific proofs which will emerge from the beginning and become more appar- em as time goes on. Again. the basic thing is the intention, the will.'
M Pompidou is too intelligent not to realise fully that whatever our present Prime Minister's intention and will may amount to, the basic thing is not Mr Heath's intention and will but the na- tion's. Since the nation's will is opposed to its Prime Minister's, and likely to re- main so, it cannot but be salutary for even the most starry-eyed marketeers among our Members of Parliament to ask themselves how they envisage their political future when, month in and month out, they are required to provide voting support for M Pompidou's 'whole series of specific proofs which will emerge from the beginning and become more apparent as time goes on'. What is this Europe our government seeks against our will to drag us. into? It is a European Europe: and once more we turn to M Pompidou for an elucida- tion we will not obtain from the market-
eers.
'A European Europe is a Europe where decisions of importance are . taken within its framework . . . If a decision is taken by one single country separately outside the community it- self, then there is no Europe as such. If, on the other hand, such a decision is taken under the influence and pres- sure of a government foreign to Eur- ope, even if it is taken within the com- munity, then it is not Europe. There- fore we must have a Europe and a European Europe. That is to say, its members act as a community and in- dependently of outside pressure, with- out, of course, ignoring the outside world.'
Here, in discreet language, is stated the anti-Americanism which is the absolute core of the Common Market. M Pom- pidou put it more crudely when, noting that French was the working language of the Market, he said: 'After all, English is not only the language of the United Kingdom, it is also that of the United States. If Europe wishes to become her- self, she must be distinct from the United States'. .
Already in the United States the essen- tially hostile stance of a 'European Eur- ope' towards America is producing the inevitable isolationist response; and if so far President Nixon has rejected calls for a massive reduction in the number of American troops in Europe, neither this country nor Europe can be assured that he or his successors will wish or be able to maintain this position when continually confronted by a 'European Europe'. To join such a Europe is to turn our backs on the United States and on the Atlantic; and it is deceitful to pretend otherwise. M Pompidou does not pretend: 'Obviously it is a very big decision that has to be taken by the Prime Min- ister and the British Government. Be- cause, as Sir Winston Churchill said, "If you ask me to choose between Eur- ope and the open sea I choose the open sea". And today I think the ques- tion is for Britain to choose Europe. I, for one, wish the choice to be made sincerely and deeply while, of course, assessing all the changes it will bring about in the way of life of the British, in their very conception of it, and in their relations with the outside world.'
The French desire for Britain to choose Europe, to turn its back on America and the open sea, is understandable, for France would gain in peace what she has sought throughout her existence from war. But is the House of Commons to provide lobby fodder for a French triumph and a British surrender whose terms have been specified by M Pompidou so clearly—that we join 'a European Europe'—when the nation itself possesses neither the inten- tion nor the will to do so?
That there are occasions when Mem- bers of Parliament may properly act against the will of the nation few would deny. Such occasions are of two kinds: first, when Members of Parliament are entitled to presume that their consciences are superior to those of their constituents, and thus pass legislation doing away with hanging and flogging for instance; and second, when the survival of the nation itself may require an exercise of un- popular will by government and com- mons, as, for instance, in declaring war. The present matter is not of these kinds. The question of conscience does not arise. And in so far as national survival is con- cerned, this is threatened rather than pro- tected by those who have it in mind to flout the nation's will. Have those Mem- bers of Parliament of all parties who have been intending to support Mr Heath on his disastrous course taken seriously the question of their political respon- sibility? It is, or may be, all right for them to mollycoddle their consciences on hanging, and we and they must perforce trust their judgment when sudden crisis precludes any possibility of heeding the country's voice. The present matter is quite different in kind. The proposal is that we should contribute ourselves to a 'European Europe', put at long-term risk the American alliance which has twice this century sustained us, turn our backs upon the open sea, jeopardise our national identity, subsidise the peasantry of France and Germany, renege on the Common- wealth, sacrifice our Parliamentary sov- ereignty—and all for what? We do not know for what, except that for whatever else it will be, it will be all for a very expensive mess of pottage. No Member of Parliament possesses the right to impose such risks and to inflict such sacrifices upon the nation against the nation's will The fanatics who wish to drag us into Europe, are behaving undemocratically, unrepresentatively. irresponsibly, friv- olously and foolishly. It is time for all re- sponsible Members of Parliament to en- sure that the Government of the country responds to the nation's will,
Previous page
